Emil Lederer · 1920
This recorded commission speaking turn responds to objections raised by von Siemens concerning the financing of a proposed coal company. Lederer addresses two distinct problems: the treatment of existing bonds and the acquisition of capital for new installations. His central move is to distinguish the practical scale of financial obligations from their legal form, and a limited state guarantee from direct state financing. The contribution offers possible solutions while explicitly acknowledging that the proposal remains incomplete.
On existing bonds, Lederer accepts von Siemens’s account of the legal position but insists that the economic burden cannot be assessed without knowing the amounts involved:
Es würde sich für uns nur darum handeln, zu wissen — und darüber müßten noch Erkundigungen eingezogen werden —, in welchem Umfange solche Obligationen im Kohlenbergbau vorhanden sind, um welche Beträge es sich handelt, weil ja von dem Umfange der Beträge die Belastung abhängt.
English translation: For us, the question would simply be to know—and further inquiries would have to be made into this—to what extent such bonds exist in coal mining and what amounts are involved, since the burden depends on the scale of those amounts.
This makes investigation, rather than an abstract objection to indebtedness, the basis of judgment. If the outstanding amounts are small relative to the value of the industry, raising funds on the capital market need not impose an excessive burden. Lederer also considers a statutory alternative. A special provision could place shareholders in a position analogous to mine owners compelled to exchange their property for bonds. Existing bonds could be rewritten, with their holders receiving a particular right against the mining assets associated with the original issuers. He presents this security arrangement as a possibility requiring further legal elaboration, not as a settled mechanism.
The second part shifts from inherited liabilities to investment needs. Discussions with experts have indicated that private capital cannot fully provide the funds required for substantial new installations; miners’ housing has already brought this difficulty into view. Lederer therefore entertains a state guarantee of interest on newly issued bonds, while carefully restricting its significance:
Das wäre aber etwas ganz anderes, als wenn das Kapital durch den Staat selbst beschafft werden würde. Es würde sich dies auch nicht auf sämtliche Obligationen beziehen, sondern nur auf die für die Neuanlagen notwendigen Geldmittel.
English translation: That would, however, be something quite different from the state itself raising the capital. Nor would this apply to all bonds, but only to the funds needed for the new installations.
The distinction preserves a role for borrowing while allowing targeted public support under exceptional conditions. Lederer closes by conceding that these financing questions remain unresolved and asking whether all of them should be addressed in legislation, especially when they concern a transitional situation. The contribution’s relevance lies in this provisional institutional reasoning: it separates existing debt, future investment, creditor security, and state assistance rather than treating them as one undifferentiated financing problem.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian